Hi, On 15/03/22 at 15:36 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > At least the following packages of which I am the maintainer or > sponsor were includined in the MBF, despite the fact that they are 1.0 > native packages with Debian revision: > > its-playback-time > spigot > vm > vtwm > chroma > > Clearly the it makes no sense to have filed bugs saying "please switch > to this other source format" when the other source format cannot > represent the package.
Those five packages: - are indeed native packages with Debian revisions - are not maintained in a VCS (or the VCS is not advertized using Vcs-*). So there's no easy way to understand how the package differs from upstream (no patch serie, no VCS history). I don't think that it's something desirable. (if the packages had declared a VCS, they would have joined cachefilesd, userv-utils, and vde2 in the "native package with a Debian revision maintained in a VCS" category.) Lucas
